Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application Number: 18/558,618 filed on 11/2/23 has a total of 15 claims pending for examination; there is/are 1 independent claim(s) and 14 dependent claims, all of which are examined below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 (e) with reference to Application Number: DE102021112760.2 filed on 5/18/21.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609.
Drawings
The drawing(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.81 to 1.85.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words in length. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
With regards to claim 9, the phrase “the support flange” appears to not be properly introduced in the claim unless it was supposed to be dependent from claim 8 which recites “a support flange”. Applicant should amend the claim to read “a support flange” or change the claim to depend from claim 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 7, 8, 10-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
With regards to claim 4, the term “and/or” in lines 3-4 renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if to interpret the term as being all inclusive or in the alternate form.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the circumference" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it’s not clear if it’s referring to a circumference of the support rod element, of the spindle rod element, or of perhaps another element?
With regards to claims 8, 10-11, due to their direct or indirect dependence from claim 7, they suffer from the same deficiencies and are therefore rejected under the same rationale.
With regards to claim 12, the term “and/or” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if to interpret the term as being all inclusive or in the alternate form.
With regards to claim 13, due to their direct or indirect dependence from claim 12, it suffers from the same deficiencies and is therefore rejected under the same rationale.
With further regards to claim 13, the term “and/or” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if to interpret the term as being all inclusive or in the alternate form.
With regards to claim 15, the term “and/or” in line 2 renders the claim indefinite since it’s not clear if to interpret the term as being all inclusive or in the alternate form.
Due to the vagueness and a lack of clear definiteness in the claims, the claims have been treated on their merits as best understood by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 2,532,168 to Jakoubek (hereinafter Jakoubek).
With regards to claim 1, Jakoubek teaches a spindle strut [figs 1-8], comprising:
a support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10] elongated in the direction of a longitudinal axis [figs 1, 7-8 – longitudinal axis along the length of element 10] with a first axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a] and a second axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to element 38],
a spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a] rotatable about the longitudinal axis with respect to the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10], wherein the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 elements 20, 20a] is held at the first axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a] of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10] against axial movement in both axial directions with respect to the support rod element, so that a rotation of the spindle nut element about the longitudinal axis does not essentially result in an axial movement of the spindle nut element with respect to the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a – is held in place at the first axial end portion against axial movement by elements 15a, 16a that hold radial flange element 22a in place while nut element 20a rotates to move element 18 along the longitudinal axis],
a spindle rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18] elongated in the direction of the longitudinal axis [figs 1, 7-8 – longitudinal axis along the length of element 10 also runs along the length of element 18], wherein the spindle rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18] is in threaded engagement [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a engage the thread of element 18] with the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a], so that rotation of the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a] about the longitudinal axis results in an axial movement of the spindle rod element with respect to the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10 – turning element 21 turns element 20 which extends or contracts the screw element 18].
With regards to claim 2, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 1, wherein the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – elements 20, 20a] has an internal spindle thread [figs 1, 7-8 – elements 20, 20a –as shown], and the spindle rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18] has an external spindle thread [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 – as shown] in threaded engagement with the internal spindle thread [figs 1, 7-8 – elements 20, 20a thread].
With regards to claim 3, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 2, wherein the spindle rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18] has a spindle rod threaded portion having the spindle external thread [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 – side that threads into/out of nut element 20, 20a] and a spindle rod coupling portion [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 – side by elements 24-30] adjacent the spindle rod threaded portion [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 – side that threads into/out of nut element 20, 20a].
With regards to claim 4, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 3, wherein the spindle rod threaded portion [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 – side that threads into/out of nut element 20, 20a] is designed as a tube or [note use of alternate language] as a solid component [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18], and/or [note use of alternate language] in that the spindle rod coupling portion is designed as a tube, and/or [note use of alternate language] in that the spindle rod threaded portion is connected to the spindle rod coupling portion by material connection [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18 - the transition to the coupling portion part, closest to eleements 24-30, is shown to change from a threaded to a non-threaded/smooth material connection].
With regards to claim 5, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 1, wherein the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10] is tubular at least in the region of its first axial end portion [column 3 lines 43-46] and in that the spindle rod element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 18], which is in threaded engagement with the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a], engages in the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10] in the region of its first axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a].
With regards to claim 6, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 1, wherein a support rod element end face [fig 7 side of element 22a closest to element 20a] is provided on the first axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a] of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10], and in, that on the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20a], a spindle nut support surface is provided [figs 1, 7-8 – side of element 20a that rests on element 22a], which is supported, in a first axial direction, on the support rod element end face [fig 7 side of element 22a closest to element 20a] towards the first axial end portion of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10].
With regards to claim 7, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 1, wherein, on the first end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a] of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10], a support rod element support surface [fig 7 element 11a] is provided, which is oriented towards the second axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to element 38] of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10] and which extends around the circumference [fig 7 element 11a extends around the circumference of element 10], and in that the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 – element 20, 20a] is supported with at least one spindle nut support portion [figs 1, 7-8 – side of element 20a that rests on element 11a] in a second axial direction away from the second end portion of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10].
With regards to claim 8, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 7, wherein, on the first axial end portion [figs 1, 7-8 end of element 10 closest to nut element 20, 20a] of the support rod element [figs 1, 7-8 element 10], a support flange [fig 7 element 22a] is provided, which provides the support rod element support surface [fig 7 element 11a], and extends around the circumference [fig 7 element 22a is a radial flange that extends around the circumference of element 10].
With regards to claim 9, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 6, wherein the support flange [fig 7 element 22a] is arranged at an axial distance from the support rod element end face [fig 7 side of element 22a closest to element 20a].
With regards to claim 10, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 7, wherein at least two spindle nut support portions [figs 2-3, 7 – elements 15] are provided on the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 element 20, 20a], arranged at a circumferential distance from one another [figs 2-3, 7 – elements 15 as shown are at a circumferential distance from one another].
With regards to claim 11, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 7, wherein the spindle nut element [figs 1, 7-8 element 20, 20a] has, in association with at least one spindle nut support portion [figs 2-3, 7 – elements 15], a spindle nut actuation portion [figs 1, 7, 8 – element 21] which protrudes radially outwards from a spindle nut central region [figs 1, 7-8 element 20, 20a] and carries a spindle nut support portion [figs 1, 7-8 element 21 is a hand wheel used to turn nut element 20, 20a].
With regards to claim 12, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 1, wherein at least one coupling element is provided on the support rod element [figs 1, 8 - elements 47, 39 couple to element 10] and/or [note use of alternate language] on the spindle rod element [fig 1 element 29 couples to element 18].
With regards to claim 13, Jakoubek teaches the spindle strut according to claim 12, wherein the at least one coupling element is designed as a perforated disk, and/or [note use of alternate language] in that at least one coupling element is designed as a pass-through opening [figs 1, 8 - elements 47 passes through an opening at the lower end of element 10 and element 29 passes through a top end of element 18].
With regards to claim 14, , Jakoubek teaches a support structure [fig 8], comprising at least two structural elements [fig 8 wall element and ceiling element] supported by at least one spindle strut [figs 1-8] according to claim 1 [see claim 1 rejection above].
With regards to claim 15, Jakoubek teaches the support structure according to claim 14, wherein the support structure [fig 8 wall element and ceiling element] is a scaffolding [fig 8 element 34 is a timber which is a form of scaffolding], and/or [note use of alternate language] in that the support structure is a formwork structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication No. 20020139910 to Shih teaches a steel prop having an outer tube, an inner threaded tube and a clamp/nut.
US Patent No. 5,758,854 to Shih teaches a steel post having an outer tube, an inner threaded tube and a clamp/nut.
US Patent No. 4,234,151 to John et al. teaches a support device having two telescopically interfitting members that move away from or towards each other along an axis.
KR 20180082104 teaches a construction beam support having an outer pipe and an inner threaded pipe that couple each other with a nut.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4152. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel P Cahn can be reached on (571)270-5616. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
DEM
/DAVID E MARTINEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights